IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 30TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2017 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE A.S. BOPANNA WRIT PETITION NO.2136/2017 (GM-DRT) BETWEEN:
SRI. HARSHITH AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS S/O RAMACHANDRA K RESIDING AT SRI. LAKSHMI NILAYA KALLURAYA ROAD KEMMINJE VILLAGE PUTTUR TALUK D.K. DISTRICT … PETITIONER (BY SRI.YOGEENDRA ACHAR B., ADV.) AND:
VIJAYA BANK PUTTUR MAIN BRANCH PUTTUR MAIN ROAD PUTTUR – 574 201 D.K. DISTRICT REPRESENTED BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER … RESPONDENT THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO MODIFY/ALTER THE ORDER PASSED BY THE DEBT RECOVERY TRIBUNAL, BANGALORE IN SA NO.71/2016 DATED 06.12.2016 VIDE ANNEXURE – D DIRECTING THE RESPONDENT BANK TO RESTORE/REDELIVER THE PHYSICAL POSSESSION OF THE SCHEDULE PROPERTY TO THE PETITIONER IMMEDIATELY AND ETC., THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER The petitioner is before this Court in relation to the order dated 06.12.2016 passed in S.A.No.71/2016. The petitioner claiming to be aggrieved by the action initiated by the respondent under the provisions of the SARFAESI Act had preferred the appeal in S.A.No.71/2016 before the Debt Recovery Tribunal (‘DRT’ for short). The DRT, on considering the appeal has set aside the sale notice dated 01.01.2016. The petitioner however contends that the Tribunal has not considered the remaining part of the relief relating to possession of the property. If that be the position, the appropriate course for the petitioner is to seek for review or modification of the order before the DRT itself.
2. In that view, the instant petition being premature at this stage is disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to approach the DRT in that regard. Registry to return the papers, if any sought for by the learned counsel for the petitioner.
Sd/- JUDGE ST